Re: `molecular resonance sequencing': trick or treat?

From: CLIFMOM@aol.com
Date: Wed Jan 10 2001 - 21:27:53 MST

• Next message: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky: "Re: Concering your neoluddite theory"
• Previous message: Michael LaTorra: "Concering your neoluddite theory"
• Maybe in reply to: Damien Broderick: "`molecular resonance sequencing': trick or treat?"
• Next in thread: hal@finney.org: "Re: `molecular resonance sequencing': trick or treat?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

There was a great article in New Scientist magazine last year about quantum
physics and genetics. It discussed why DNA has four base pairs instead of
just a binary two.

• Next message: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky: "Re: Concering your neoluddite theory"
• Previous message: Michael LaTorra: "Concering your neoluddite theory"
• Maybe in reply to: Damien Broderick: "`molecular resonance sequencing': trick or treat?"
• Next in thread: hal@finney.org: "Re: `molecular resonance sequencing': trick or treat?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:04:45 MST